Irfan Pathan questions Indian Cricket Board’s selection consistency; Points Hardik Pandya’s participation

The Indian Cricket Board’s recent announcement of central contracts for the 2023-24 season has sent shockwaves through the cricketing world. Two notable omissions were Shreyas Iyer and Ishan Kishan, both talented youngsters who have impressed in recent times. This decision, however, was not solely performance-based, but rather a message sent by the governing body regarding player commitment to domestic cricket.

Iyer and Kishan, despite being part of India’s plans, made themselves unavailable for selection in the prestigious Ranji Trophy, the premier domestic tournament. This move was seen by the Board as a disregard for the importance of domestic cricket, which serves as a vital platform for identifying and nurturing young talent. The board, through its secretary Jay Shah, had previously emphasized the need for contracted players to participate in domestic tournaments to maintain their fitness and form.

The Board’s stance highlights the delicate balance between international aspirations and domestic commitments. While the lucrative Indian Premier League offers significant financial rewards and exposure, it is the domestic circuit that provides players with sustained competitive experience across different formats and conditions. Skipping domestic matches, especially for established players like Iyer and Kishan, sets a potentially detrimental precedent for younger generations.

Looking forward, the onus is on Iyer and Kishan to respond positively. Consistent performances in whatever cricket they play, coupled with a demonstrably renewed commitment to domestic cricket, will be crucial for their prospects with the national team. The Board, on the other hand, will be closely monitoring the situation, with this decision setting a precedent for future player selection and their commitment to the broader cricketing ecosystem.

Check out Irfan Pathan’s tweet: 

“If this doesn’t apply to all…” – Irfan Pathan opines on Indian Cricket Board’s central contracts rule

Irfan Pathan‘s perspective on the matter offers an intriguing counterpoint to the Board’s stance. He acknowledges the talent of the omitted players and expresses hope for their return while simultaneously hinting at an inconsistency in expectations. His pointed query about Hardik Pandya, who primarily focuses on white-ball cricket, exposes a potential double standard within the Board’s decision-making.

Essentially, Pathan questions the selective application of rules related to domestic cricket participation. If players can opt out of red-ball domestic matches entirely, should the same allowance not apply to those prioritizing white-ball formats? His underlying argument suggests that the Board needs a more consistent and nuanced policy, rather than one that appears to target certain players or formats. This lack of uniformity, according to Pathan, could hinder Indian cricket’s overall success in the international arena.

“They are talented cricketers, both Shreyas and Ishan. Hoping they bounce back and come back stronger. If players like Hardik don’t want to play red-ball cricket, should he and others like him participate in white-ball domestic cricket when they aren’t on national duty? If this doesn’t apply to all, then Indian cricket won’t achieve the desired results,” he wrote on X.